The pie is the total revenue of Apple (specifically, $215.6 billion) so every penny that Tim Cook and the other executives get is a penny that didn't go to the people actually doing the work. Yes, I realize it would only be a difference of a few cents per employee, but it's still unfair for one person to make more in one day (day after day) than most people make in a year.
So what you're saying is now that Cook's compensation has been cut, all other Apple workers have been given raises? Because that's what the implication would be to your line of thinking.
The question that never seems to get asked is: Why do these executives get these incredible salaries? Does anybody - apart from the tiny elite at the top - really think it is good value for money?
The question that never seems to get asked: What business is it of yours what some else at a private company gets paid? Apparently, the board of directors think it is good value for the money. If they didn't, the board of directors and stockholders will get rid of them and hire someone else. I'm not a Tim Cook fan, and I think he's made several bad decisions, but I'm not a stockholder--or a busybody either.
With hours left for humanity a large two dimensional hollow triangle appears above the planet, shoots the asteroids until they are harmless dust particles, and then pops out of existence.
Probably had something to do with this: The Crown. I know my stepson & his wife were pretty intrigued by John Lithgow's performance and they wanted to know more about him, so I ended up getting them a Churchill book for Christmas, which they appreciated.
The 'Free Market' is straight up marketing lie because it is wholly and totally dependent upon nothing in that market ever being Free, everything 'owned' and 'controlled', so that those with the most can control and exploit those with the least. With everything that can be owned being owned, including all of the essentials to life, so that denial of life becomes the tool of exploitation of the not free at all market place of human lives.
Nice equivocation. The term free in "Free Market" means free as in speech, not in beer. You need to understand something before you can properly criticize it. However, you'd be correct if you said we don't have a free market in the United States. A free market wouldn't have corporate welfare, farm subsidies (which are mostly corporate welfare), government bailouts or wage controls and most likely no intellectual property rights.
Surprisingly insightful. You can't pick and choose what you get outraged about.
Of course you can. It's called partisanship and it happens all the time. The Red/Blue Team will always get outraged when the Blue/Red team does something the Red/Blue team did when it was in power, but that was different because they were the ones doing it! For instance, I'm looking forward to the return of the anti-war left, missing since 2008.
And Obama had this power too. Don't remember quite how far back this goes, but pretty sure Bush was able to do it too.
And EVERY president going back to the start of the Emergency Broadcast System, since 1963, has had the ability to commandeer all airwaves as well. It was accidentally set off once, in 1971.
Stop pointing out the facts, you're foiling the F.U.D. apparatchiks!
If you pray, you're basically circumventing drug access controls. Also, cerebrospinal fluid should be banned due to its DMT content (not to mention vision problems in space).
You're asking the wrong question. You should be asking "So why are drugs still illegal?"
Six years is a pretty good run an all. That said, I do wish they would actually update the 2011 17" MBP with the nifty matte screen and the upgradable memory and hard drive bays.
This is my current MacBook Pro. I'd replace it in a heartbeat if they released a new 17" matte screen. I don't really care about the upgradable memory or Hard Drive, as I usually order mine maxed out when I do.
Snopes discredited themselves through their blatant political bias. Sure, each answer can be justified, but the bias is obvious in the choice between "not true" v.s. "partially true".
Yeah, but their bias is definitely left-leaning, which is why I thought it would be seen as a credible source by my friend.
The most recent fake one that I've seen, with its supports absolutely adamant that it's real, is the "Clinton didn't really win the popular vote, Trump did!" thing. They defend it to the day they die, despite the fact that it's flatly contradicted by all official sources, can be traced back to the guy who made it up, and is based around factually incorrect statements about how votes are tabulated.
I saw this on Facebook from Judge Jeanine Pirro. I went and checked, and couldn't find any returns that supported it.
Not that the left is innocent in all of this. I still keep seeing that fake quote about Trump saying that Republican voters are idiots who will believe anything. How many times do you have to point out that it's fake for people to stop circulating it?
Another friend of mine posted the Trump quote and I linked to Snopes showing it was a fake, figuring he would see that as authoritative.. One of his friends said "Yeah, and who runs Snopes?!?" Another one of his friends said something like "So what if it's not true? After all the lies he told about Hillary, we need to keep circulating it a million times!" SMH.
That's why we make them. My chainsaw makes much faster work of a tree than I could chewing it with my teeth. I don't even want to think how long that would take.
There's something about a physical interface that I just never get with a touch-sensitive screen. I miss the clunk of the keys on the old Macs of the 1980s.
OK. People don't need to be actually stupid and you put it into much better words, but it's still not something you can blame facebook for.
The problem is with the blame Facebook theory is even if they didn't believe these types of stories, the people I know who were Trump supporters NEVER would have voted for Clinton.
Fake news on facebook did not effect the election. It was the people stupid enough to believe them.
I have several friends who are Trump supporters, and a lot of them posted some of the most ridiculous stuff from non-credible news sources (think "less credible than InfoWars"). I wouldn't call any of them geniuses, but I wouldn't call them stupid either. Were they gullible and guilty of wishful thinking? Sure, but definitely not stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Sit down and figure out how you can make any decent income off of a $30 phone, even if made in India.
There's already a bunch of phones for the $30 price point available in the states, not sure why they can't sell them there for the same price.
Javascript is a mistake, same as CSS. Just look around, you'll see how bad things have gotten if you take off the rose-colored glasses.
If CSS is implemented correctly, it should reduce page size in terms of data transmitted, given that you're viewing multiple pages of the same site.
The pie is the total revenue of Apple (specifically, $215.6 billion) so every penny that Tim Cook and the other executives get is a penny that didn't go to the people actually doing the work. Yes, I realize it would only be a difference of a few cents per employee, but it's still unfair for one person to make more in one day (day after day) than most people make in a year.
So what you're saying is now that Cook's compensation has been cut, all other Apple workers have been given raises? Because that's what the implication would be to your line of thinking.
The money they pay those high-priced exec doesn't come out of thin air, it comes directly out of our pockets, in the form of higher prices
So you really think Apple bases their prices on how much they are paying their executives? Guess again.
and lower wages.
There is no pie. Someone making more money doesn't automatically mean someone else is making less.
Well, first, oil and gas subsidies have to stop, so I think it'll be a while before they're "cheap".
Faraday Future is also getting subsidies. After all, we wouldn't want any of these billionaires to have to actually risk their own money, would we?
The question that never seems to get asked is: Why do these executives get these incredible salaries? Does anybody - apart from the tiny elite at the top - really think it is good value for money?
The question that never seems to get asked: What business is it of yours what some else at a private company gets paid? Apparently, the board of directors think it is good value for the money. If they didn't, the board of directors and stockholders will get rid of them and hire someone else. I'm not a Tim Cook fan, and I think he's made several bad decisions, but I'm not a stockholder--or a busybody either.
With hours left for humanity a large two dimensional hollow triangle appears above the planet, shoots the asteroids until they are harmless dust particles, and then pops out of existence.
Sounds familiar.
Probably had something to do with this: The Crown. I know my stepson & his wife were pretty intrigued by John Lithgow's performance and they wanted to know more about him, so I ended up getting them a Churchill book for Christmas, which they appreciated.
The 'Free Market' is straight up marketing lie because it is wholly and totally dependent upon nothing in that market ever being Free, everything 'owned' and 'controlled', so that those with the most can control and exploit those with the least. With everything that can be owned being owned, including all of the essentials to life, so that denial of life becomes the tool of exploitation of the not free at all market place of human lives.
Nice equivocation. The term free in "Free Market" means free as in speech, not in beer. You need to understand something before you can properly criticize it. However, you'd be correct if you said we don't have a free market in the United States. A free market wouldn't have corporate welfare, farm subsidies (which are mostly corporate welfare), government bailouts or wage controls and most likely no intellectual property rights.
Yes, it was a flashing GIF that said, 'you deserve a seizure'. This was a deliberate attack.
What if the flashing GIF said "Have a nice day!", and the victim had a seizure after seeing it? Would that still be a deliberate attack?
Surprisingly insightful. You can't pick and choose what you get outraged about.
Of course you can. It's called partisanship and it happens all the time. The Red/Blue Team will always get outraged when the Blue/Red team does something the Red/Blue team did when it was in power, but that was different because they were the ones doing it! For instance, I'm looking forward to the return of the anti-war left, missing since 2008.
And Obama had this power too. Don't remember quite how far back this goes, but pretty sure Bush was able to do it too.
And EVERY president going back to the start of the Emergency Broadcast System, since 1963, has had the ability to commandeer all airwaves as well. It was accidentally set off once, in 1971.
Stop pointing out the facts, you're foiling the F.U.D. apparatchiks!
If you pray, you're basically circumventing drug access controls. Also, cerebrospinal fluid should be banned due to its DMT content (not to mention vision problems in space).
You're asking the wrong question. You should be asking "So why are drugs still illegal?"
Six years is a pretty good run an all. That said, I do wish they would actually update the 2011 17" MBP with the nifty matte screen and the upgradable memory and hard drive bays.
This is my current MacBook Pro. I'd replace it in a heartbeat if they released a new 17" matte screen. I don't really care about the upgradable memory or Hard Drive, as I usually order mine maxed out when I do.
to bad apples hardware sucks!
to bad indeed!
Snopes discredited themselves through their blatant political bias. Sure, each answer can be justified, but the bias is obvious in the choice between "not true" v.s. "partially true".
Yeah, but their bias is definitely left-leaning, which is why I thought it would be seen as a credible source by my friend.
The most recent fake one that I've seen, with its supports absolutely adamant that it's real, is the "Clinton didn't really win the popular vote, Trump did!" thing. They defend it to the day they die, despite the fact that it's flatly contradicted by all official sources, can be traced back to the guy who made it up, and is based around factually incorrect statements about how votes are tabulated.
I saw this on Facebook from Judge Jeanine Pirro. I went and checked, and couldn't find any returns that supported it.
Not that the left is innocent in all of this. I still keep seeing that fake quote about Trump saying that Republican voters are idiots who will believe anything. How many times do you have to point out that it's fake for people to stop circulating it?
Another friend of mine posted the Trump quote and I linked to Snopes showing it was a fake, figuring he would see that as authoritative.. One of his friends said "Yeah, and who runs Snopes?!?" Another one of his friends said something like "So what if it's not true? After all the lies he told about Hillary, we need to keep circulating it a million times!" SMH.
That's why we make them. My chainsaw makes much faster work of a tree than I could chewing it with my teeth. I don't even want to think how long that would take.
There's something about a physical interface that I just never get with a touch-sensitive screen. I miss the clunk of the keys on the old Macs of the 1980s.
Well, you could always get an ADB to USB dongle... ;-)
Do you realize NYT is less credible than InfoWars?
Yep. Especially their poster child Paul Krugman. Claimed that the markets will never recover, then this happened.
OK. People don't need to be actually stupid and you put it into much better words, but it's still not something you can blame facebook for.
The problem is with the blame Facebook theory is even if they didn't believe these types of stories, the people I know who were Trump supporters NEVER would have voted for Clinton.
Fake news on facebook did not effect the election. It was the people stupid enough to believe them.
I have several friends who are Trump supporters, and a lot of them posted some of the most ridiculous stuff from non-credible news sources (think "less credible than InfoWars"). I wouldn't call any of them geniuses, but I wouldn't call them stupid either. Were they gullible and guilty of wishful thinking? Sure, but definitely not stupid.
What about advertisers that inclusively target specific racial and ethnic groups?
Or hair care products? Dark and Lovely
Also it wouldn't hurt to have much greater emphasis on critical thinking skills in public education.
"Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason why so few engage in it." - Henry Ford
How about Wow, a double win! I'm all for it, as long as they take their share of the national debt with them.
Maybe we could sell California to the Chinese in exchange for forgiving their share of the national debt...